‘Tough budget’ won’t gut cities, vows municipal affairs minister

Doug Griffiths addresses Urban Development Institute

“We can’t say what’s in the budget, but the premier’s been very clear ... that we will not be balancing the budget on the backs of municipalities,” says Municipal Affairs Minister Doug Griffiths.

Photograph by: Calgary Herald/Files
, Calgary Herald

CALGARY — Municipal Affairs Minister Doug Griffiths says the province won’t balance the budget on the backs of municipalities, but adds Alberta is no closer to giving cities taxation powers under a city charter.

With the March 7 provincial budget looming, municipalities are hoping to learn more about sustainable long-term dollars, including Premier Alison Redford’s promised hike to the Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI), the province’s capital funding program for communities.

But what that will look like remains unknown.

“We can’t say what’s in the budget, but the premier’s been very clear, and I think you can take her at her word, that we will not be balancing the budget on the backs of municipalities,” Griffiths said Tuesday, after addressing an Urban Development Institute luncheon at the Glenmore Inn.

“It doesn’t mean they’re going to be exempt from a tough budget. Ultimately, we know they have infrastructure demands just like we do with a million people moving here in the next 10 years. I think, given the fiscal circumstance with the province, I think they’ll be OK.”

The current budget earmarks $896 million for MSI this year, while the province’s business plan calls for $1.05 billion for 2013-14.

Griffiths also made remarks about the ongoing talks with municipalities regarding taxation powers that reveal the province is no closer to agreeing to a big city charter.

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi has long said he thinks the province could grant council the right to new tax powers.

The memorandum of understanding the minister and mayors of Calgary and Edmonton inked to start charter talks last year doesn’t appear to be much closer to any agreement.

“I don’t call it the city charter. I call it the civic charter because I don’t see it just applying to cities. As we go through developing the civic charter I’ve said time and time again that first we have to discuss our roles and what we do with the 95 per cent of the roles we actually work together on. Who’s going to have responsibility for what, and then we can talk about revenue if we need to,” Griffiths said.

“But revenue has to be the last thing we talk about because if all we start off with is how we’re going to raise more revenue, we’ll forget about everything else and that won’t help improve the relationship,” he said.

“I also don’t see civic charters being a stand-alone piece of legislation. I see it incorporating itself into the Municipal Government Act so that any municipality that decides that they’re mature enough to take on a new role knows what the corresponding responsibility is going to be and how revenue is going to play into the picture. And that any municipality can accept new responsibilities and roles based on the needs of their communities,” Griffiths said.

“I don’t want to create multiple tiers of municipalities or present any special powers to anyone, especially taxing powers, until we’ve had a thorough discussion about the roles and responsibilities we’re going to have.”

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.